User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters/Archive05

New Stuff

Note: Would editors please start paying attention to WP content rather than flamewars and personal vendettas? Or at least do so on my User_talk page? I'm quite old enough to be well past the schoolyard; and I was never a bully, boor, or pugilist, even when I was a teenager. Can't we at least strive for a level of pettiness no greater than on slashdot.org or Usenet?

Mel Etitis on Smoddy RfC

I'm afraid that, though your message to me was reasonable, I can't agree that your recent behaviour has been. Even before the new RfC I'd been concerned that your flailing around, leaving silly and inflammatory messages, etc., was making the first RfC more and more appropriate. If you'd behaved sensibly, the RfC would have fizzled out, leaving the nominators looking bad. Instead, you've managed to erase or at least dull the memory of the wrongness of that RfC. I really, seriously suggest that you start to calm down, and do some sensible editing.

Done. Have you looked at my edits of late? They are basically all of content pages, despite the persistent attempts of a few teenaged ruffians like Jguk and Smoddy to draw me into more flame-fests. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 21:33, 2005 May 24 (UTC)

As for the "vprotected" notice, why did you think that it was appropriate to claim that a page was protected when it wasn't? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:13, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

This may be familiar to you, but it is not clear to a relative newcomer to WP administravia (like me) whether a user can protect her own user page. Nor whether the {{vprotected}} and {{protected}} tags are recommendations or actual locks. I guess from your comment the first, at least should only be added by an administrator (but the software itself doesn't do anything to indicate this). What about the second? Is that also administrator-only? Also, what about {{inuse}}, can anyone add that? What other tags are there that any editor can add, versus those only an admin can add? Isn't there a category "sysop" also? (not that it matters for this matter). Are there any tags an editor can appropriately add to her user page to discourage hit-and-run editing?

I'm not being rhetorical here, I would actually like to know.

Oh, hey. If you feel like sating my curiosity, and know the ins-and-outs of administravia what is the policy on autobiography pages. Jguk, in his spurious VfD claimed that copying in another bio about me to the page David Mertz was a grave breach of rules. A few of the pro-stylist chimed in with the same thing. In chatting with a different admin more recently, I heard that it was "no big deal", but just a rule-of-thumb that editors aren't usually neutral about themselves. Frankly, it's hard to keep the rules straight among a whirlwind of garbage accusations. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 21:26, 2005 May 24 (UTC)

But it's not a matter of adding a template; it's a matter of doing what the template says. If you haven't protected the page, then why say that you have? Only an admin (a.k.a. a sysop) can protect a page, and protecting User pages is only done in extreme cases (as an admin I'm often the target of vandalism, but I've never protected my page). Adding a template of any kind is hardly likely to stop people vandalising. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:36, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

I am allowed to use the {{inuse}}, aren't I? And, in principle, aren't I allowed to add the {{NPOV}} tag if I think it applies, also? Or {{VfD}}, though I guess that requires adding a notice somewhere else, right? (I have not ever done those... but by this point I'm pretty sure I'll get RfC'd the next time I use any tag, on the grounds that some administrative arcana says to do it differently). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 21:49, 2005 May 24 (UTC)

As for writing an article about yourself, it's certainly deprecated at least. Those editors on whom there are articles usually feel tht it's at least good taste not to edit them, unless something seriously incorrect is added. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:36, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Is the issue the writing or the page creation. I did not do the first, but I did do the second. That is, I pasted in a bio someone else had written of me on a different Wiki, after I saw several references to me on WP pages. However, I did touch up the wording a little, but just for grammar and flow, not significant content. Well, in any case, several other people have made it much better since then; so that's ancient history. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 21:54, 2005 May 24 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Hi, thanks for your kind message. I am going to do that right now. In case, I did something foolish, I am sad. Actually, I do agree with you - such foolish things donot have place even on a talk page. Byee.--Bhadani 04:09, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

RFC by Jguk

Sorry I couldn't help you. Part of the reason is that, for various reasons, I haven't been at Wikipedia much for a while. Maurreen 04:14, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I think the silliness is in the past, and I am just working on unrelated articles (as the whim strikes me, which is way too much)... I should also spend less time here, and more on either paid writing or the volunteer stuff I do that isn't so flame prone. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 05:45, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)

Python Book

Sure, I'd love to have your publisher send me a copy - but I just got one last week!!! I'm in the early stages of a move, but once I'm settled I'll make it a top priority to read and play with. I'm sure that a WP article will be forthcoming - and an Amazon review - this time different enough that nobody will jump on the cpyvio page.

The first few chapters of the PDF copy were good - but I don't read electonic books - I want pages to turn and spill coffee on! Funny how small the world is - we've corresponded by email in the past - had no idea it was you.

• John Elder 18:47, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I confess that I had not realized we had emailed before. I'm sure if I look through my archives, I can find it. But I get quite a few inquiries out of my book and articles, so sometimes forget names from months or years back (sorry). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 21:34, 2005 Jun 10 (UTC)

I didn't recognize your name until I connected it with the book ... ;) No need to be sorry! John Elder 00:18, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Protected your user page

I have taken the liberty of protecting your user page since it is under attack by those users you describe in WP:AN3. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:54, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks muchly Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters

You're welcome. Just remember that if you want that page to be edited, you'll have to ask me or any other admin because I recommend that it be protected for several days. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:11, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• On the other hand, the protection of user talk pages states that "User talk pages should only be protected in cases of persistent vandalism, and then only for as brief a period as possible." -- which is almost next to none. So I suggest you leave the msg left by 67.121.92.159 (talk · contributions) here for now. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:16, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Nevermind. They were blocked. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:19, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Your User page

You're welcome. I really don't like other people editing people's User pages. RickK 19:07, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, thanks for reverting vandalism on my User Page. I feel some people like to vandalize user and other pages for plain fun (lol), and excitement. But, the recent vandalism of Stone Age is really sad, an a serious matter. After all, it was COTW and vandalising it is insulting the entire community of wikipedians.--Bhadani 04:01, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Your user page is unprotected now

Hopefully the vandals will not return. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:31, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Something you might like to have written?

Got this off my Google personalized page today:

Anarchism is founded on the observation that since few men are wise enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others.

— Edward Abbey

Enjoy! John Elder 28 June 2005 06:54 (UTC)

Nice quote. I always liked Abbey. Monkey Wrench Gang was a very positive influence when I was a teenager. I reckon I'll put that on my front page, in polite deference. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 2005 June 28 15:06 (UTC)

Congradulations!

You had the honor of reverting the dumbest vandal of all time - congradulations :) →Raul654 05:10, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Wittgenstein

Yes, it's Paul Monk. I forget his exact credentials, but he's an Aussie and the head of some sort of think tank or consultancy firm. I got the review from one of the databases of publications I have access to at work. Ray Monk appears to be no relation. --  ajn (talk) 18:24, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

I did a quick search for "Paul Monk" on google, and presumably found the same Aussie who has reviewed a variety of books. It still seemed like a minor coincidence that one Monk is a well-known Wittgenstein scholar, while a different Monk reviewed the Cornish book.

But then, I was once at the Rethinking Marxism conference that my local UMass Amherst holds that had presentations by both Stephen J. Gold and Stephen Jay Gould. And I knew in grad school a Steve Best who is a PoMo sort of guy in comparative lit, but is not the same Steve Best who is a PoMo sort of guy in philosophy (I think the philosophy guy, whom I don't personally know, is maybe 5 years older than the lit-crit one I know). :-) Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 18:34, 2005 July 30 (UTC)